google.com, pub-9442811071336901, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0

LIVE! Karen Read Day 25: KEY State Witnesses Explain Google Searches & Accident Reconstruction

#lawyeryouknow #karenread

View the entire Karen Read playlist here: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTjIJ7zrQ_srydOiVW-PI91fo7meanz3z

🔴 Do you or someone you know need to speak to a real lawyer about a personal injury or wrongful death case? Please reach out to our firm and we will make sure to answer your questions or find someone who can. Our consultations are always free and confidential. You can call our firm at (727) 441-9030 or email us at lawyeryouknow@gmail.com.

✅ For business inquiries contact me at lawyeryouknow@gmail.com
✅ Let’s connect: https://www.tragoslaw.com/
Twitter – @LawyerYouKnow
Instagram – @tragoslaw
Facebook – @LawyerYouKnow
TikTok – @LawyerYouKnow
✅ Join our email list here – https://bit.ly/33lV3Mb

✅ Get your Lawyer You Know merch here – https://bit.ly/LYKMerch

✅ Become a LYK Channel Member Here – https://bit.ly/3OecDDD

*SUPERCHATS & DISCLAIMER – 1. Superchats read out are not to be taken as my opinion nor endorsed by me. 2. Questions are answered on best efforts based on my knowledge and jurisdiction.*

🔴 NOT LEGAL ADVICE

Visit YouTube Channel

40 thoughts on “LIVE! Karen Read Day 25: KEY State Witnesses Explain Google Searches & Accident Reconstruction

  1. Years ago I rear ended someone going <5 mph. Not a scratch to her car, bc of where the cars made impact my headlight was cracked a bit. Also, the ring camera of KR’s SUV leaving John’s house looked like a much smaller chunk of the taillight was missing than the pic when it was in police custody. I came into this trial low-key believing the coverup, then swung back to who knows what happened. The last few days of trial tho seem like the defense is doing a way better job of proving the cover up than I thought would be possible.

  2. I'm always skipping around in tabs on my phone. I'd imagine a lot of people do. If this is accurate, I'm surprised it hasn't ever come up in another case. Also, if you need an expert to prove that one of your major witnesses might be telling the truth, that seems like a bad sign.

  3. Re: Accident Reconstructionist: I don’t think I heard the direction the vehicle was ever going. Because if she pulled up in front of the house (most likely the driveway) with the house on her left, flag pole farther back to the left, JOK would get out put him in the middle of the road closest to the right tail light, she would have to be going way fast and angled to get John at the flag pole. Otherwise at this drop off then hit direction John would either land in the street or across the street lawn. If coming from the other direction with the house on her right she would have to pass the house let John out of the car then hit him. Then my question is why pass the house. I’m not think about the damage on the vehicle other than the corner that it is. Plus car at 25 mph against a soft human won’t cause any damage to the car as shown in this case.
    And if I as an architect, who makes decisions that can affect human life, did my job as poorly as this guy I would loose my job.

  4. Re Google: 2:27 was not a search it was the time that tab was in use by either exiting Google or shutting the phone off. No Google searches until 4:23 when she started with all the spelling errors within the same tab of the 2:27 search. So the actual first search with the spelling errors was the 4:23 which can look like a 2:27 search to a lay person. Basically Google was inactive from 2:27 to 4:23. For those of us who are tech illiterate, it’s hard to understand tech witnesses but when they say the 2:27 time stamp doesn’t reflect a Google search it reflects the time when that tab was exited. Exited by a number of ways: moved to another tab, opened another tab, moved to another application, took a phone call, shut the phone off. This witness was never asked what the phone did next, she only testified to the Google searches.

  5. Are people not listening to Lucky's testimony??? The reason why the Ford Edge stuck out to him is because it was parked illegally and blocked his snow plow and he had to drive around it. He did the Albert's a courtesy by not calling the car in and having it towed. That's why it's stuck out to him. Hitting a basketball net is not a big deal and when you're driving a snow plow yes you might hit debris. But having to avoid a car is much more impactful and not calling the police to impound it then a freaking basketball net

  6. 1:07:16 this testimony isn’t making sense. He almost had me with the “signs of a pedestrian impact “ but he’s lost me again!

    If JOK got scratches on his arm from the broken taillight, then is he saying the impact with John’s arm is what broke the taillight?

    If John’s body was to the left with the cocktail glass in his left hand and his body hit behind it, how did the taillight break and how did he also get scratched by it?

    Can someone make this make sense?!?!

  7. They never lined up the two vehicles to check points of contact, at which time Karen would have to be inthe vehicle so her slight weight would make a difference in contact points. Not done?

  8. Pile of snow maybe. I think they are wrong that she hit him, if you check the video from when Karen left to go look for John and she backed into his car, as she drove away the red from the back up lite shows a full red glow, the glass was still intact.

  9. Intrigued and confused by the digital forensics expert's explanation, I experimented switching back and forth between windows and tabs to see what the Google Chrome history log registered. The limitations of this simple experiment can provide a basic understanding of what a more in-depth analysis with more powerful tools could be even more capable of revealing.

    NOTE: These experiments were solely done using Google Chrome referencing the entire Chrome history log and the related timestamps

    The Device used was a MacBook

    Similar to spelling errors, capital and lowercase letters were recorded in the Chrome history log as typed into the search bar

    This video of the court case is in a separate window | Between typing in searches I switched between windows then back to this video in a separate window

    Ensuing Click events pausing and restarting this video were not registered in the Chrome history (only the original time I started the video – 3:14am – registered in the history)

    Order In Each Window Goes From Left to Right | EX. – WINDOW 1: Tab1 | Tab2 | Tab3

    WINDOW 1 TABS:

    [3:39 AM] why is the sky blue | Tab1

    [3:39 AM] how am I able to tell the difference between red and pink | Tab2 (The search in this tab replaced by) –––––>

    [3:45 AM] do smart people talk fast | Tab2 (Not necessarily, but it can give the impression you are smarter and make you sound confident)

    (SWITCHED TAB LOCATIONS: Tab1 –––> Now Tab2: why is the sky blue moved to the right of do smart people talk fast Tab2 –––> Now Tab1 | Repositioning of tabs not registered in Chrome history log)

    [3:46 AM] do smart people talk fast | Tab1

    WINDOW 2 TABS:

    [3:39 AM] how do i tell if my husband is gay | Tab1

    [3:52 AM] how do you recognize a manipulative person | Tab2

    (Minimized this window containing the 2 tabs – Event not registered in Chrome history log)

    WINDOW 3 TABS (Unintended Clicks on Tabs):

    [3:47 AM] Outlook outlookdotofficedotcom

    [3:47 AM] Mail – Name – Outlookdotofficedotcom

    WINDOW 1 TABS (Returned to enter more searches):

    [4:00 AM] What color is elmo from sesame street | Tab3 (Trick Question: The first one was a Black male and the second is a White male)

    [4:02 AM] kevin clash elmo | Tab4

    [4:07 AM] Kevin Dillon Elmo | Tab5 (Error: Should have typed “Ryan” | The search in this tab replaced by) –––––>

    [4:08 AM] Ryan Dillon Elmo | Tab5

    WINDOW 4 (Testing Errors):

    [4:43 AM] how ti make make mexican hot chocolate | Tab1

    [4:45 AM] how to make make mexican hot chocolate | Tab2

    [4:48 AM] how to make make mexican hot chocolate | Tab3

    FINAL NOTES/OBSERVATIONS:

    – Different types of browsers (e.g. Mobile phone, Safari, Chrome) may record activity differently however repetitive searches as done for Mexican Hot Chocolate in WINDOW 4 did not negate, overwrite replace or otherwise alter the timestamp of prior searches in the Google Chrome history log. I do not understand how this data is not recoverable by her tools.

    – Click events on specific tabs where the tab was minimized or tab positions were switched in the window were not registered in Chrome history log

    – As expected, the expert’s arsenal of forensic tools is much more in-depth and sophisticated. Google Chrome does not show suggestions made as the user typed search entries into the search bar as she was able to view (9:079:44).

    – It is unclear why she was able to obtain such time-specificity down to the second at one point stating, "two twenty-seven and forty seconds AM" (6:086:16). The Chrome history time stamps are limited to hours and minutes. Why she did not or is not able to separate the timestamped search entries from the browser state events in "Browser State DB/Cache DB" (like moving tabs, minimizing windows, etc.,) and place them into chronological order is unknown. This is also the case specifically because one cannot enter a search term into the search bar at the same time that they close a window, move a tab, etc., because each thing occurs sequentially rather than concurrently.

    – A table expressly showing solely the times of each search in addition to the State of the Browser database would provide more clarity about when the search was made inquiring how long it takes to die in the cold (16:3017:25)

    – I must have missed the part of the testimony where she provided handouts and explained the capabilities, uses and differences between the technologies and logs she references (e.g. Cellebrite, pList, Write-ahead log, etc.) Purportedly Magnet AXIOM is a digital forensics platform that can help examiners build a holistic view and map connections and timelines to help them see the BIG PICTURE.

    – It is strange that she calls the software "SeeQua Lite" (26:2026:51 ) rather than Es-Cue (SQ) Lite like the company does as the name is related to the language SQL

    – It seems unwise to speak so rapidly and use terminology because if people do not understand, rather than merely thinking "That's over my head, I'm just too dumb to understand," it forces them to resort to their own logic as I have done.

    – Due to the fact that even the Chrome history sequentially logs the search activity occurring on each tab irrespective of whether they are in the same or separate windows and her continuous reference to the State of the Browser database (rather than individual search times and results), she was unable to convince me that the initial search did not actually occur at two twenty-seven AM.

  10. Peter – I don't think there has been a single map or chart depicting the position of JOK on the lawn including whether his head was north pointing south on Fairview. Or, he was pointed at an angle at 30 or 40 degrees towards the house.

  11. I think this prosecution female phone expert said there were more searches on Jen MCbabe's phone after both the basketball search AND the "Hos long to die in snow?". If there were more searches by Jen late that night, wouldn't ALL of them get the 2:27 time stamp? Also – Jen made a number of searches before the basketball search. So then….wouldn't the time stamp for everything googled via Safari in that early morning session be, like 1:40 a.m.? It's almost getting a "batch" time stamp for a whole bunch of searches done in a single session. There must be some way to get underneath this level. The defense experts are FBI cellphone experts who do work on terrorists, espionage, the military, etc. I'm sure the FBI can get to the bottom line of the data, or honestly say there is no data for it. That's what they do for living.

  12. my brain just melted…I have used same tabs and they often glitch…not out of the realm of possibilities that there was a glitch of hold depending on phone etc.

  13. I've been hit by a car twice (I know unlucky), Both times I was riding a bike, so not the same situation. But the first time I was 5, she was driving 40-50 kph and I left no damage on the car, my bike wheel was bent into a C shape. The next time I was 14 the driver was leaving a carpark so going less than 30kmph (at a guess) I rolled up on her bonnet, smashed my head on her front driver's side light and split my eyebrow, the headlight was undamaged. I know I weighed less than a 6ft fully grown man but the speed she was going how the hell did he even crack the light. I wasn't even concussed by either incident. I just cant see how a fully grown man being hit at such low speeds was injured enough to be knocked out, if he was just hit and in pain he would have gone inside for help, not just laid down in the cold. It's possible he was bending over, and the car hit him at a very specific angle to knock him out but there's been no evidence to show that in any way so far, they've had 6 weeks and there's nothing presented so far that would make a hit and run make sense.

  14. This is one case I am definitely getting a true bias from you. I have never felt that way before and truthfully loved your unbiased opinions. I feel diheartened.

  15. this accident testimony is nonsensical. neither side claims an impact didn't happen. a five-year-old knows both crash theories could've produced the damage. the only issue, in this case, is the CW must PROVE that hitting JOK caused the damage. they don't come anywhere near that burden.

  16. I have a degrees in Mathematics and have worked in data analysis, mathematical modelling and computer programming/ coding.

    The first expert witness did a poor job at explaining complex information in laymen’s terms.

  17. Maybe he was told he didn’t need measurements in this case. If someone thought they didn’t need or wouldn’t need an explanation of what happened he just didn’t do a thorough investigation. Shoddy at best.

  18. She probably closed out the browser after the first 6am search, then opened up again and made the 2nd 6am search. Hence, the second search showed up at the correct time. The first search was still using the opened browser

  19. For every “expert” that seems to indicate the time stamps don’t matter or are some cockamamie guess work as this witness seemed to hint there will be 20 to state it does matter, it does offer proof of time lines and when used completely will prove a sequence of time. She seemed defensive and crabby to me so my mind dismissed her as argumentative.

  20. I take great issue with the tail light lense pieces. Every photo taken shows them laying directly on grass. The likelihood of the snow completely melting under every piece of glass is absurd. It looks very staged like the pieces were set out individually to try and make it appear they waited until they became visible days later.

  21. The prosecution “expert” intentionally speaks fast and uses as many technical terms as she can to try to show how smart she is. She’s just a paid person trying to produce a very messy narrative.

  22. 23 mph backwards in 5 seconds? In the snow? What about hard braking? So she gunned it in reverse in front of the house and took off, yet left no tire tracks on the grass and nobody saw or heard anything. Riiigghhhttt…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *